Doxastic Responsibility

被引:0
|
作者
Neil Levy
机构
[1] University of Melbourne,Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, Department of Philosophy
来源
Synthese | 2007年 / 155卷
关键词
Moral Responsibility; Indirect Control; Dual Control; Doxastic Voluntarism; Counterfactual Intervener;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Doxastic responsibility matters, morally and epistemologically. Morally, because many of our intuitive ascriptions of blame seem to track back to agents’ apparent responsibility for beliefs; epistemologically because some philosophers identify epistemic justification with deontological permissibility. But there is a powerful argument which seems to show that we are rarely or never responsible for our beliefs, because we cannot control them. I examine various possible responses to this argument, which aim to show either that doxastic responsibility does not require that we control our beliefs, or that as a matter of fact we do exercise the right kind of control over our beliefs. I argue that the existing arguments are all wanting: in fact, our lack of control over our beliefs typically excuses us of responsibility for them.
引用
收藏
页码:127 / 155
页数:28
相关论文
共 50 条